Researchers must therefore not bring research into disrepute by, for example: • Falsifying research evidence or findings; • ‘Sensationalizing’ findings in a manner that sacrifices intellectual capital for maximum public exposure;

• Distorting findings by selectively publishing some aspects and not others; • Criticizing other researchers in a defamatory or unprofessional manner; • Exploiting the conditions of work and roles of contract research staff; • Undertaking work for which they are perceived to have a conflict of interest or where self- interest or commercial gain might be perceived to compromise the objectivity of the research;

• Undertaking work for which they are not competent; • Using work carried out with co-researchers as the basis of individual outputs without the agreement of the co-researchers concerned; • Using research for fraudulent or illegal purposes.

45 Where researchers become aware of examples of malpractice or potential malpractice they must present their concerns, in the first instance, to the researchers involved. With due consideration to the important principle of the public’s right to know, researchers should avoid bringing the community into disrepute through public accusations or allegations.

46 Subject to any limitations imposed by agreements to protect confidentiality and anonymity, researchers must make their data and methods amenable to reasonable external scrutiny. Te assessment of the quality of the evidence supporting any inferences is an especially important feature of any research and must be open to scrutiny. Where sponsors initiate the request for scrutiny, and disclosure of aspects of the data may be injurious to participants, researchers should consider assuring the sponsor of the integrity of the work through the scrutiny of a mutually acceptable third-party, who is also bound by the non-disclosure agreements.

47 Researchers must accord due respect to all methodologies and related methods. Tey must contribute to the community spirit of critical analysis and constructive criticism that generates improvement in practice and enhancement of knowledge.

Authorship

48 Te authorship of publications is considered to comprise a list of everyone who has made a substantive and identifiable contribution to their generation. Examples of substantive contributions include: contributing generative ideas, conceptual schema or analytic categories; writing first drafts or substantial portions; significant rewriting or editing; contributing significantly to relevant literature reviewing; and contributing to data collection, to its analysis and to judgements and interpretations made in relation to it.

49 Academic status or other indicator of seniority must not determine first authorship; rather the order of authorship should reflect the relative leadership and contributions made by the researchers concerned.

Responsibilities to Educational Professionals, Policy Makers and the General Public

50 Researchers have a responsibility to seek to make public the results of their research for the benefit of educational professionals, policy makers and a wider public understanding of educational policy and practice, subject only to the provisos indicated in previous paragraphs.

51 Educational researchers must endeavour to communicate their findings, and the practical significance of their research, in a clear, straightforward fashion and in language judged appropriate to the intended audience.